“Courtside Karen” was no match for LeBron. Juliana Carlos, the alleged social-media influencer ejected from Monday’s Atlanta Hawks game for dropping F-bombs on Los Angeles Lakers superstar LeBron James, says she’s sorry for her actions. “To say things escalated quickly at (Monday’s) game is an understatement, and I want to apologize for losing my cool and removing my mask in the heat of the moment,” wrote Carlos, the wife of Atlanta businessman Chris Carlos, late Tuesday on her Instagram page. “What should have been a quick back-and-forth between two adults got out of hand and my natural insti...
Internet joins Rick Wilson in ignoring McCarthy and demanding investigation into Republicans involved in 1/6
Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) said on Monday that the reason her colleagues are afraid of the Jan. 6 Commission is that it could reveal that some GOP lawmakers were involved. Former Republican Rick Wilson noted that it's the exact reason that Democrats should move forward with investigating those officials suspected of helping attackers of the U.S. Capitol.
McCarthy had worked with Democrats on the commission, even sending written items that he wanted. For some reason, McCarthy has decided he opposes it after Rep. John Katko (R-NY) agreed with the terms.
"If the Democrats have the stones to pull it off -- an open question, TBH -- it will make Benghazi look like a sewing circle," tweeted Wilson on Tuesday. "They can't possibly look inside the reality of that day and maintain the Big Lie. They can't admit to the clear causality of Trump unleashing his mob. It opens them to personal, moral, and political liability for that day. More important in their minds is something darker. They see the majority in their grasp, and just as they did in the states this year, they'll strike quickly, mercilessly, and without a moment of hesitation of a scintilla of shame to make the next election the last."
"For them, the problem wasn't an attack on our republic and a democratic election. For Kevin and Co, the problem was that it didn't work the first time. They need the shock and awe, the spectacle, the Trumphadi terror threat out there," Wilson continued. "This zero-sum game of power/not-power is what the Democrats never, ever, ever grasp. This year in the states, the GOP -- directed and assisted by Heritage Action -- has passed sweeping voter restrictions. Democrats couldn't mount a response. They played defense.
"Even now, too many think policy will save them. "But our climate plan" or "but our control gun plan" or "but our daycare plan" isn't politics. It's masturbation. The bad guys are willing to send people to kill you and you respond with a white paper? GTFO," he closed.
It was something that many agreed with, questioning who was involved from the inside and the importance of holding those members as accountable as those arrested by the Justice Department.
See the comments below:
@taradublinrocks @TheRickWilson There you go he's implicated in so many ways,, even his judgment is flawed!— Doug (@Doug)1621357271.0
@TheRickWilson Lev indicates, “He’s in the bag!” https://t.co/a8pTlkhPFA— Chris (@Chris)1621357680.0
@Clgbuddybutton @TheRickWilson And why did that guy help barricade the chamber to keep those “tourists” out?— Ann Hoffman (@Ann Hoffman)1621346238.0
@TheRickWilson They will never vote for something that will convict their conscience. It’s about self preservation— Secret Jewish Space Laser (@Secret Jewish Space Laser)1621344500.0
@IndoTweet1 @TheRickWilson Exactly. How much money was spent on that witch hunt. It was all a witch hunt. I’m sick… https://t.co/JfLpMAIe1Z— BB714CHI (@BB714CHI)1621361637.0
@TheRickWilson THIS is why I love @TheRickWilson: he delivers the cold, hard truth in a way that connects viscerall… https://t.co/HUpJZe1d3L— FFreniere (@FFreniere)1621345337.0
@king_sandirella @TheRickWilson I want to hear Mastriano testify about his secret meetings with Trump & Giuliani le… https://t.co/zM8pajZWXh— NaNa Rocks (@NaNa Rocks)1621354414.0
@TQSideways @TheRickWilson The Republican Party is owned, body and soul, by the Koch’s and their donor network. The… https://t.co/LTP5BfDs3b— AZcatladysupportsBiden (@AZcatladysupportsBiden)1621359167.0
@Blackgrlbrowney @TheRickWilson Correct. It doesn't need to be bipartisan at all. But I guess they wanted to give… https://t.co/cM2HhSROcq— Janel Forsythe (@Janel Forsythe)1621347665.0
Listen to my friend @TheRickWilson 👇He speaks truth. https://t.co/2hAUUi5QBc— Michelle Kinney (@Michelle Kinney)1621345411.0
If we are to ever fully recover from Jan. 6, we have a lot of changes to make, and we need to make them fast.… https://t.co/ip0TtVUkTR— The Lincoln Project (@The Lincoln Project)1621351927.0
@TheRickWilson The former administration did everything in its power to normalize bad behavior from the top to the… https://t.co/0QxatLJvhP— sister golden hair surprise (@sister golden hair surprise)1621341175.0
@TheRickWilson This should have started Jan 21, 2021.— Debbie O'Connor (@Debbie O'Connor)1621345850.0
As the so-called Arizona election audit continues, Republicans are starting to recognize how foolish they look as a party because of it, explained Washington Post reporter Phillip Bump.
At least one Republican, the Maricopa County Recorder, erupted at his own party while speaking to CNN Tuesday morning.
"It was one thing with the audit when they were looking at UV lights and looking for bamboo fibers in the paper," Stephen Richer said. "But when they just accused us too many times of breaking the law, they defamed our good employees too many times, they've defamed the hard-working people here. We're all humans, and we have our limits!"
Other Republicans took issue with the "bamboo" conspiracy theory that somehow "Asia" brought in 40,000 ballots to help President Joe Biden win. No bamboo was ever found in ballots, but they were convinced it was possible.
"It's time to say enough is enough," said Bill Gates, the vice chairman of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and not affiliated in any way with Microsoft. "It is time to push back on the 'big lie.' We must do this. We must do this as a member of the Republican Party, we must do this as a member of the Board of Supervisors. We need to do this as a country."
Gates along with several other colleagues unleashed in a blunt letter that it's time for Arizona state Sen. Karen Fann (R) to admit that it's over.
At this point, even Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has agreed that Biden is the 2020 winner and he's ready to move on.
"To be very clear, there is nothing unusually sloppy or unfounded about the Arizona audit," wrote Bump. "With no obvious exception, all of the allegations of fraud and malfeasance that have emerged since Trump lost six months ago have been equally shoddy and baseless. Each of them has been the product of an under-informed or obviously biased complainant — or, alternatively, has been numeric prestidigitation meant to imply fraud that never actually manifests in any other way."
He closed by explaining that the unusual part of this display is that it has happened through a formal process but based on absurd claims from President Donald Trump, Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) and Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL). The difference is that it's happening at a moment when no one is paying attention and much of the country has moved on. The audit activists are insisting that the Republican officials in place can't do their jobs properly and they're doing it without any form of evidence to justify the claim.
"There probably will never be a 'have you no sense of decency' moment for Trump's effort to argue that the election results were suspect," Bump closed. "But Republicans coming together to identify the flagship effort to undermine those results as biased and sloppy is at least a step in that direction."
More than 60 years ago, President Dwight Eisenhower took a break from his busy schedule to answer a letter from a terminally ill World War II veteran. The ailing man, Robert Biggs, had respectfully criticized Eisenhower's recent speeches for projecting a sense of uncertainty, explaining that "we wait for someone to speak for us and back him completely if the statement is made in truth." The 34th president felt that people in democracies should be wary of needing to feel certain about important issues.
"I doubt that citizens like yourself could ever, under our democratic system, be provided with the universal degree of certainty, the confidence in their understanding of our problems, and the clear guidance from higher authority that you believe needed," Eisenhower argued to Biggs. "Such unity is not only logical but indeed indispensable in a successful military organization, but in a democracy debate is the breath of life."
While some debate whether bipartisanship is desirable, a recent study in the scientific journal "Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America" (PNAS) reveals that Eisenhower may at least have been correct when he observed that people who feel a need for ideological certainty fuel political polarization. The scientists monitored and analyzed the brain activity of politically engaged people and found that, regardless of whether they were liberal or conservative, they shared at least one trait: If they had a strong aversion to feelings of uncertainty, they tended to become increasingly polarized in their ideology and perception of events.
The scientists recruited a few dozen participants, liberal and conservative alike, to watch video clips that included a nature documentary, a neutral news segment about a politically controversial subject and a segment from the 2016 vice presidential debate. Jeroen van Baar, PhD, a co-author of the study who is now a research associate at Trimbos, the Netherlands Institute of Mental Health & Addiction, explained to Salon that he and his colleagues noted that participants' brain activity looked different as they viewed "a polarizing video clip" from the vice presidential debate between Tim Kaine and Mike Pence in 2016.
"When participants watched a nature video," van Baar explained, "their brains looked the same."
What exactly does it mean when van Baar says brains "looked" the same or different? The scientists used a technique called "brain-to-brain synchrony."
"If you show two people a video while scanning their brain activity, this activity ramps up and down at different times, depending on how these people feel," van Baar explained. "The brains of people who have similar subjective experiences tend to 'tick together', i.e. show synchronized activity."
The opposite is also true — the brains of two people who have different subjective reactions to the same video will respond "quite differently," according to van Baar.
The scientists learned that people with similar political views had increased synchronization when watching politically charged — as opposed to neutral — content. (That's what van Baar calls the "same-lens effect" at work.) And the team found this synchronization to be increased among people who are also intolerant of uncertainty.
Study co-author Oriel FeldmanHall, an assistant professor of cognitive, linguistic and psychological sciences at Brown University, told Salon that being intolerant of uncertainty is a personality trait that can have an effect on everything from a person's willingness to participate in risky behavior to their comfort when meeting new people — and it can exacerbate what FeldmanHall called "neural polarization."
"Two individuals who were intolerant to uncertainty exhibited a greater neural synchrony . . . when watching the same political content, regardless of whether they identify as a Democrat or Republican," FeldmanHall said. "To put it simply, intolerance to uncertainty led to more ideologically polarized brain responses."
The good news here, FeldmanHall explained, is that targeting the fear of uncertainty could help cross divides. That could help make political debate — democracy's "breath of life," as Eisenhower put it — more effective.
"There are lots of different things that one can do to reduce anxiety relating to uncertainty," FeldmanHall said. "And if you can harness these practices, effectively making yourself more comfortable with uncertainty, you are more likely to 'reach' the other side."
Van Baar elaborated on what this might look like.
"A solution would be for politicians—and anyone debating politics—to simplify, simplify, simplify," Van Baar told Salon. "Try to say what you mean in the most concrete and unambiguous terms you can come up with. You may still find that your opponent disagrees with you, but they might for the first time understand what you are trying to say. And mutual understanding may eventually grow trust between political factions."
This brings us back to Ike. The president probably did not intend to dismiss Biggs' concerns when he wrote that letter in 1959, but it appears that he may have wanted to listen to him more closely. Perhaps there is a case to be made for finding a middle ground — in politics and in life — between being overly-certain and not being reassuring enough.
Don't Sit on the Sidelines of History. Join Raw Story Investigates and Go Ad-Free. Support Honest Journalism.
$95 / year — Just $7.91/month
I want to Support More
$14.99 per month